SamUK96

Not to be dismissive of your idea, but isn't this decade(s) old? QT Creator, Dreamweaver, Wordpress, etc... All are in some form a "drag-n-drop code gen" tool. Could you elaborate on your point and how it differs from the existing codeless tools?

Representation is a convoluted thing to talk about, let alone "measure". Many factors influence how many of $group enroll in a course, and with gender there are many, one of the main ones being that many women chose to stay at home and raise their children. You have to consider if the difference in enrollment and/or parcipitation in $jobgroup is down to outright discrimination, or willful chosing of $persongroup.

To obtain plastic, you need oil, which often requires removal of entire swathes of the biosphere. Funny how just one step can fool people like that.

To be honest, there is a virtue signalling aspect to all this, it's pretty obvious that companies exploit this to increase sales. In my very honest opinion, does anybody with a bit of sense really think the boardroom at $corp care about Gay Pride in any real and considerable way - other than to exploit customer's desire to show their virtue about it with flashy rainbow mugs?

I would be careful, since you quite quickly shot towards being bias, by disregarding any merit to the side that you very obviously disagree with. Just like how you said they deride, you just did exactly the same. How is the problem of devisiveness and the environment going to be solved like that?

Progress never comes from deriding IMHO.

a good developer would do a simple *ngIf and do a toggle on either using <a href=...> or <my-fancy-button (click)="navToPage()">. Call it "olde time mode".

What this is about is the increasing financialisation of the world's economy, in other worsds, consumers don't buy a "fridge" and own a fridge and have dominion over it (classical unfinancialised markets), they instead subscribe to a service that cools their food. This on HN and in other wealthy techno-cratic circles is more-often known as "$something-as-a-service" (or just "XaaS").

It's a trend that is in my honest opinion one of the more increasingly troublesome and negative aspects of modern human civilisation. Xaas has a nasty side-effect of concentrating wealth and power to fewer and fewer individuals, it creates a much deeper power structure, since one finances another who finances another who...and so on, and the more you financialise the more you can financialise - an unstable equilibrium, or "positive feedback loop". With classical unfinancialised markets, it is a more Slack(the app)-like flat structure, where products are exchanged and ownership is transfered. Everyone becomes an owner. Power, wealth, and resources diffuse similar to that of the heat equation.

We can see this nasty effect in the housing markets, for example. The current situation where the law and society in general allows a growing number of ownership-hoarders who buy up many houses in an area and lets them out to their fellow underlings is a rather dangerous and volatile setup, and historically does not end well for anyone, but especially those up top.

It would be very interesting to know how bridge metrics (length, load specification, etc.) relate the longevity. Of course, some bridges last for centuries, but some last for decades. This is an order of magnitude!

I'm going to get penalised for this but I have to say it because I presume no-one else will: Why the hell is this on HN? It has nothing directly related to anything to do with HN, and clearly has an agenda from the article's rather obviously biased language. Most countries limit "legal" immigration anyway, by means of minimum requirements. My country, the UK, has some of the more stricter ones, an example is that students have to be earning £30k salary to stay in the country after their studies.

Rather shoddy journalism. It's been especially bad on HN recently...

> sleepwalk into oblivion

Tell that to the Egyptians, Romans, Easter-Islanders (debated now, actually), and the countless other human civilisations who didn't really appreciate their impending demise before it was too late. Hell, the Romans hired essentially barbarians (so mercenaries, basically) to defend the northern territories against...you guessed it, barbarians.

Just because the bulk of the harmful effects that humans contribute to begin at 50+ years, conveniently after humans have to live through it. Humans still create children to suffer through the hell they created though, how peculiar.

War on cancer has been...not completely a fail? Certainly made harder by profiteering, but, y'know.

Also, I find "War on poverty" hilarious. Like a country saying it's "making crime illegal".

Hard to say. I don't think there will be a well-defined turning point. The thing is, the climate changes on long scales, and humans only pay attention to the immediate details, like children analyzing the stock market. The climate will get _gradually_ worse, and people will be forced to migrate north where the environment is more livable. This is obviously what is happening now, and isn't fully sustainable. A little patch of green (Europe) can't feed the world, in slightly over-the-top terms.

However, I will say this. If anyone has ever been in a large storm, or a drought, you'll be shockingly aware at how quickly a small announcement about "sold-out water" or "store stock issues" turns into absolute, utter, pure, _pandemonium_. Once _that_ happens often enough, I think people will begin to admit that we lost _something_, for sure.

To answer your question though, it's generally believed that it will be a gradually-growing sense of despair and dread, and a growing struggle. Migration into the northern hemisphere as it slowly becomes the last livable place on Earth. Ever played musical chairs in the later stages of the game? Yeah.

Honestly, it's remarkably similar to the mechanics behind the French Revolution, but instead of just rich vs poor, it's some kind of crazy triadic chaos-war between rich, poor, and nature, all made more ironic that nukes have a triadic motif.

> As non american, I’d love to know more about this kind of business with China, and how it relates to the US government political choices. Why the US looks so scared by China, if it has such economic relatons eith it?

It's not just the US. The entire west is afraid of China. In around the Reagan years, the US - along with almost the entire west - offshored their manufacturing to China et al. Of course, now it's been about 40 years since and almost all of large scale manufacturing has moved to china (i.e. steel).

In the end the west wanted cheap imports, and they got it. But IMHO we are beginning to wake up to the fact that nothing is for free (as always), and what the west gained from having a virtually 1-billion-strong externalised pseudo-slavary labour force, they will pay in their own demise as an entire western generation grows up unable to build anything, begging to be economically annhiliated. The west made china a god and asked for bountiful reward - who wants to bet they will give it to the west forever?

I'm curious how that connection to a sat net works with a normal consumer laptop. Or do you have some fancy General Dyn laptop?